Nah, its a mate of the wife. I'm only going as it's a day off work, the outlaws are looking after the kids and there is alcohol there
Anyway, getting back to the OP, I really don't know where I stand so if anyone can shed more light on the matter? I understand both points of view on the potential of a name change; we have been called Hull City AFC for 109 years, so there is the traditionalist view that the name should not be changed. But times do change - traditionally we travelled by horse and had gas street lights. Change is not always bad, and there have been innumerable instances of entities (not football clubs per se) that have "re-branded" to move with the times. Personally I think that both Hull Tigers, and Hull City Tigers sound ****, and would prefer to keep the name as it is. I have seen suggestions that one of the reasons for the alleged change of the name is to make us more marketable in Asia. People have (rightly in my view) questionned whether a simple name change would make us more marketable. Conversely I have seen it said that if we change the name it could damage our marketability in this country. I am not sure on what basis that is said or where the evidence of that is? As to the suggestion that Assem wants to change the name on a whim, I haven't seen anything to back that up (I appreciate OLM not wanting to reveal sources). As to people not believing what NT says, as he is a director I would have expected him to know whether or not there is a name change on the agenda. He says not. If the club are blatantly lying to the supporters I would be extremely worried. It could be that people are reading too much into the wording of a carefully constructed press statement. I hope that is the case anyway.
The new commercial name has just as much, if not more appeal to the North American market; but owners, not supporters. I believe one more American EPL club owner would give them, collectively, a big say in future EPL strategy. I believe this has more mileage that that of selling strips.
and we will lose all that? it's a change of NAME! ****ing hell, if it wasnt for the Allams we would have most definitely lost our club!
what does that make you then? (that's a rhetoric question by the way, the meaning of which you will probably need to look up..) and your grammar is crap.. "least funniest" should read "least funny".. carry on..
weak argument. Stalin helped save Europe from the Nazis which gave him carte blanche to murder millions of innocent citizens it's a non sequitur.
I agonised over that for hours and got it wrong. Fair play, I hold my hands up. Point still stands though.
What's in a name ? A rose ? Will Shakespeare (Romeo & Juliet) Istanbul....Constantinople ? (Geopolitics) It's the essence ? I'll still support them.
Looks like we're not the only club worrying about a name change. Rumour has it that Leeds are in talks with Red Bull over a potential sponsorship deal, which could lead to a complete kit change to the Red Bull brand colours, and a change of name of the club and stadium.
I was just reading about that, Leeds Red Bulls... http://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co....link-up-with-drinks-giant-exclusive-1-5869843
allow me to be pedantic once again.. Constantinople to Turkish people is the embodiement of the Ottoman Empire, the calpiphate & Islam. So in 1923 under Ataturk, Ankara was made the capital & Istanbul the new name for their largest city. They also wished to do away with the reference to Byzantine Emporer Constantine. A double whammy, if you wish. I seriously doubt any Turks cried over this change as for them they were making a break from a history they wanted to be distanced from. Hull City are not.
Always get it right, do you? I "keep up" by noting that "HCFC" is how you choose to refer to the club, which makes you an utter moron. FACT.
